Evaluation of Stress Response in Middle-Aged Male Diabetic Hypertensive Patients

• Published in: The journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism Vol. 108; no. 9; pp. 2307 - 2314
• Main Authors: Alloqi Tahirbegolli, Iliriana, Tahirbegolli, Bernard, Şen, Selçuk, Sayın, Betül, Kaşkal, Mert, Üresin, Ali Yağız
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: US Oxford University Press 18-08-2023
• Subjects: Blood pressure; Clinical; Cognitive ability; Comorbidity; Cortisol; Diabetes mellitus; Heart rate; Hormones; Hypertension; Mathematics; Patients; Problem solving; Statistical analysis; Stress response; Istanbul Turkey; Turkey; stress test; salivary cortisol; diabetes mellitus; hypertension
• ISSN: 0021-972X; 1945-7197
• DOI: 10.1210/clinem/dgad122

Abstract
Context
Stress triggers a cascade of reactions that alter the organism's dynamic steady state. There is a scarcity of interventional studies that show cortisol variability upon stress over time in groups of patients with chronic noncommunicable diseases and comorbidities.
Objective
We aimed to examine salivary cortisol changes in the cognitive stress response of patients with hypertension and diabetes mellitus (HT&DM) and patients with hypertension (HT) and to determine differences between them.
Methods
The study was conducted using a stress test of solving an arithmetic task in 62 patients with HT&DM and HT who were being treated in the outpatient clinic of the Medical Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacology Department in Istanbul University, Istanbul Medical Faculty Hospital.
Results
There was no statistically significant difference between the HT&DM and HT groups for systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) values (P = .331 and P = .058). When measured by repeated ANOVA, salivary cortisol level [F (1.842, 60) = 8.771, P < .0001], SBP [F (2.185, 60) = 12.080, P < .0001], DBP [F (2.793, 60) = 6.043, P = .001], and heart rate [F (2.073, 60) = 13.259, P < .0001] were statistically significant for the main effect (time), while the effect of the group × time interaction factor was statistically not significant (P = .773; P = .751; P = .713 and P = .506, respectively).
Conclusion
The arithmetic problem-solving task used with the HT&DM and HT patients was useful as an acute stress test in the laboratory environment. There was no statistically significant difference for group × time interaction factor between the HT&DM and HT groups; however, the salivary cortisol and BP values increased significantly after acute stress within each group.